Spring Break
Obama's relationship with NATO could make or break him
Egon Donnarumma
Issue date: 2/24/09 Section: Commentary
While the role of NATO has changed dramatically in the past 20 years, it has not become obsolete. Though it no longer stands to balance the power of an expansionist Soviet Union in defense of the free world, the western alliance still serves to stabilize threats to smaller nations as well as help facilitate American foreign policy.
With the end of the Cold War, the role of NATO has come into question. Since the establishment of the European Union, Europe as a unified group has been seeking autonomy from the U.S.
On the other side of the Atlantic, the U.S. has shown not only the capability to act alone militarily, but also the desire. In 2001, the United States justifiably chose to decline NATO assistance in the Afghanistan invasion. This move was to cut down on bureaucratic holdups and allow the world's most dominant military power more freedom to operate efficiently. However, NATO need not be dismissed entirely.
To small and midsized nations, especially those bordering Eastern Europe, the protection offered by the organization is significant. In a recent column in The New York Times, Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg asked that President Obama not overlook the smaller countries in Europe to focus just on the big names - Britain, France, Germany - when he comes to the NATO summit in Germany this April.
Illustrated by the war in Georgia last summer, Russia is a dominant force in the region and a source of nervousness for many countries. The Czech Republic and Poland in particular have reason for concern. With a missile defense system harshly opposed by Russia to be installed, these nations will depend on NATO more than ever. Despite its rhetoric, Russia will be much less likely to use military force against these nations - as it did in Georgia - because of their treaty organization membership, and Article 5 that accompanies it, which considers an attack against one member an attack against all. Schwarzenberg hopes that Obama's visit will send a clear message to Moscow that the Czech Republic is no longer under the shadow of Russian dominance.
With the end of the Cold War, the role of NATO has come into question. Since the establishment of the European Union, Europe as a unified group has been seeking autonomy from the U.S.
On the other side of the Atlantic, the U.S. has shown not only the capability to act alone militarily, but also the desire. In 2001, the United States justifiably chose to decline NATO assistance in the Afghanistan invasion. This move was to cut down on bureaucratic holdups and allow the world's most dominant military power more freedom to operate efficiently. However, NATO need not be dismissed entirely.
To small and midsized nations, especially those bordering Eastern Europe, the protection offered by the organization is significant. In a recent column in The New York Times, Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg asked that President Obama not overlook the smaller countries in Europe to focus just on the big names - Britain, France, Germany - when he comes to the NATO summit in Germany this April.
Illustrated by the war in Georgia last summer, Russia is a dominant force in the region and a source of nervousness for many countries. The Czech Republic and Poland in particular have reason for concern. With a missile defense system harshly opposed by Russia to be installed, these nations will depend on NATO more than ever. Despite its rhetoric, Russia will be much less likely to use military force against these nations - as it did in Georgia - because of their treaty organization membership, and Article 5 that accompanies it, which considers an attack against one member an attack against all. Schwarzenberg hopes that Obama's visit will send a clear message to Moscow that the Czech Republic is no longer under the shadow of Russian dominance.
Be the first to comment on this story